Bounds V. Smith – Case Summary And Case Brief
Judicial History: North Carolina prisoners sued federal district court. The inmates claimed that because the state had failed to provide them legal research facilities, they were denied access. This is a violation of the 14th amendment. The motion was granted by the district court. The state was required to create a program for legal assistance. The court also accepted a North Carolina library plan. In the court’s ruling, the courts ruled that states are not required to provide legal counsel. The state requested review and was granted certiorari by the Supreme Court.
Facts. The District Court only had one state prison library. The inmates were unable to access any other legal assistance while they filed their claims at the District Court.
The administration of prisoners: States must ensure that they provide adequate legal assistance to them. Legally qualified people, for example.
Reasoning: Prisoners have the constitutional right to go before the courts. To stop claims of infringement of fundamental constitutional rights, this entry must be fair, sufficient, relevant, and timely.
Because the court may pass the complaint’s earlier, it is crucial that prison inmates file the correct claims. The court grants the request in forma pauperis, but can reject it if it is not necessary. A prisoner cannot negate the arguments of the state if there is no library.
This is where the importance of legal assistance lies. They have not refuted past arguments.
Concurring Oppinion-Powell
Dissenting Opinion–Burger: The Federal Constitution does not allow the federal government to interfere in state prosecutions. Federal court might not want states to finance prison law libraries.
Dissenting opinion-Stewart
Dissenting Opinion – Rehnquist They were free to contest the decisions of the state courts.
